As INEC reassures Nigerians, errant politicians sneer: If Nigerians are questioning INEC’s integrity, there is a reason. Is INEC really independent? How realistic is it to expect the empaneling of an independent umpire by a president who told Catholic Bishops on July 28, 2026, that he would not make it easy for his rivals in the 2027 presidential election? Is it possible for a president who unabashedly declared that: “Those who want to unseat me will try, I won’t help them tie a rope around my neck, we will wrestle till the end. All is fair in politics,” to champion the cause of free, fair and credible elections by creating a level-playing field for all?
By Ikechukwu Amaechi
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has reassured Nigerians still smarting from its 2023 shenanigans of its readiness, this time, to deliver credible elections in 2027. The reassurance came from the INEC chairman, Joash Amupitan, a professor, whose great skill and knowledge in law earned him the prestigious rank of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) who appreciates that democracy being a rules-based game should be governed by constitutional rules, laws and institutional norms.
Speaking at a strategic workshop for editors in Abuja this week, Amupitan noted that “democracy is a journey, not a destination,” which requires constant care, vigilance and institutional courage. Reiterating that its strength depends on the quality of the partnership between those who manage the vote, those who monitor the vote, and those who report the vote, the learned silk made a solemn vow: “As the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, my commitment to Nigeria is firm: our allegiance is to the Constitution and the law, and our sole obligation is to the Nigerian electorate. We have no preferred candidate, no preferred political party, and no agenda other than guaranteeing a free, fair, transparent, and credible election.”
Ideally, that is how it should be. But many are skeptical. And the reason is simple – precedence. Amupitan’s predecessor, Mahmoud Yakubu, made the same vow and wilfully violated it. In November 2022, Yakubu, claiming independence as Amupitan is doing now, assured that election results from polling units across the country would be uploaded in real time to the commission’s portal.
“The commission will upload polling unit level results and citizens will have access to those results in real-time as we upload your polling units,” he crowed, adding: “This innovation was introduced by the Commission and the Commission cannot turn around and undermine itself. So, this technology has come to stay. We will upload polling unit level results from the polling units and citizens would have the right to view these results. After all, who are we serving? The citizens. How can we deprive the citizens from having access to the results of the process conducted by them at the level of polling units? We are committed that the votes cast by Nigerians will determine the outcome of the election. Nothing more, nothing less.”
But when it mattered most, he failed spectacularly to make good his vow. Results from polling units were not uploaded to the INEC portal in real time as promised. When some political parties demanded temporary suspension of the presidential election result collation, Yakubu demurred. Instead, on February 28 when the agitation grew louder, he adjourned collation till the next day. Surprisingly, like a thief in the night, he sneaked back to the International Conference Centre (ICC), Abuja, the National Collation Centre, on March 1, at about 4am to announce Bola Tinubu winner.
So, if Nigerians are questioning INEC’s integrity, there is a reason. Is INEC really independent? How realistic is it to expect the empaneling of an independent umpire by a president who told Catholic Bishops on July 28, 2026, that he would not make it easy for his rivals in the 2027 presidential election?
READ ALSO: Nigeria’s political augury is getting starker
Is it possible for a president who unabashedly declared that: “Those who want to unseat me will try, I won’t help them tie a rope around my neck, we will wrestle till the end. All is fair in politics,” to champion the cause of free, fair and credible elections by creating a level-playing field for all? Many Nigerians doubt the possibility.
In the last one month, I have had cause to lament the slow, albeit steady descent of the country into the arena of political intolerance and violence as we march towards the 2027 elections. On September 10, I lamented the show of impunity and political rascality in the article, “2027, APC and merchants of political violence.”
I called out APC because there was ample evidence all over the country that rather than persuading voters, the ruling party’s stalwarts – Kuje Area Council chairman, Danjuma Shekwolo, warned residents in August to either vote for the APC in 2027 or leave the council area; Ebonyi local government chairman, Paul Ituma, warned opposition politicians to steer clear unless they were willing to suck up to Governor Francis Nwifuru; Nwifuru himself threatened to remove any council chairman who fails to deliver his council area to the APC in 2027; Senator Francis Fadahunsi issued a fatwa ahead of the August 15 Osun governorship poll, when he told APC supporters to “kill” members of the rival Accord Party; Muhammad Gadaka urged married Yobe women to divorce their husbands if they prevented them from voting APC in 2027; the two governors constricting the inalienable rights of citizens to freedom of association and movement – Monday Okpebholo of Edo State and Rev. Fr. Hyacinth Alia of Benue State – are all APC members.
Also in September, Sainna Buba, Borno Commissioner for Youth and Sports Development, an APC chieftain, warned critics of the Babagana Zulum administration that those who “raise” their fingers against the government would have them cut off, at a political event organised by the City Boy Movement, a political support organisation backing Tinubu’s second-term bid.
Recently, I wondered aloud why there was no national outrage when Jarrett Tenebe, Edo State APC chairman, made a reference to firearms while speaking on Okpebholo’s promise to deliver 2.5 million votes for Tinubu in 2027.
“Those who do not wish us well, who want to create an obstacle for us, I have a prayer for you. So, anybody who refuses, who wants to stand in our way, for us not to have those votes that we intend to give to Mr. President, AK-47 fire,” he declared. I wondered what would happen to convince us that politicians are dangerously spinning out of control and the Nigerian state has the duty of reining them in.
What does it even mean when a governor who has only one vote vows to deliver millions of votes to Tinubu willy-nilly? That in itself is democratic profanity, which should attract INEC’s attention if, indeed, Amupitan is prepared to walk his talk.
Well, that national outrage seems to be here at last. But what triggered it is instructive. A viral video surfaced a few days ago showing a Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) Kano State House of Assembly candidate, Aminu Warkal, displaying a pump-action rifle and allegedly firing shots into the air during a political rally.
Nigerians are enraged. And rightly so. The Kano State Police Command has invited him for questioning, as it should. And even INEC is outraged. Prof Amupitan called out the thuggish behaviour of Warkal as he addressed editors in Abuja and vowed that the Commission would have zero tolerance for campaign violence and hate speech.
“As electioneering intensifies across the country, I must sound a clear note of warning to all political parties, candidates, and campaign managers: INEC will not stand by and allow political competition to devolve into violence, intimidation, or inflammatory rhetoric. Democracy thrives on the clash of ideas, not the clash of weapons or the proliferation of hate speech,” he said, promising further that “any political party or candidate implicated in inciting violence, disrupting rivals’ rallies, or deploying armed thugs will face direct statutory sanctions and swift prosecution. No political office in this country is worth the blood of a single Nigerian.” Well said!
But the question that has concentrated my mind in the last couple of days is this: Does it take an infraction by a member of the opposition for INEC and the police to react? I ask this because Tenebe is no less a thug than Warkal. So, why is he being treated with kid gloves while the police are holding Warkal to account? Is it because Tenebe is an APC chieftain and a supporter of President Tinubu while Warkal is not?
As condemnable as Warkal’s conduct is, we should not lose sight of the lesson, which is: No individual, no matter how powerful, and no political party – ruling or opposition – has the monopoly of violence. While one thug is in Benin promising AK-47 fire, another thug is already firing the shots in Kano in what has become an existential threat to Nigeria. Any society where a citizen’s capacity for violence and terror determines level of political ascendancy will unravel sooner than later. Such a society’s political progression is doomed. If these thugs and merchants of violence, including governors who are promising votes that they do not have in order to impress the god of Aso Rock, are not reigned in no matter their political affiliation, ethnic origins and religious inclinations, Nigeria will be worse for it in the long run.
Sadly, as INEC is busy reassuring Nigerians of its determination to deliver credible elections, errant politicians who know better are sneering.
